Our Top Story Tonight: PTA, "Jane" and "The Crow" Reboot Find New Stars

Today was a slow news day, but we did get some interesting news tidbits as the film community prepares for the Cannes Film Festival in two weeks and Hollywood dives into the summer movie season. Let's take a look...

The most interesting story, in my opinion, is that Benicio Del Toro has joined the cast of Paul Thomas Anderson's Inherent Vice, an adaptation of Thomas Pynchon's novel about a pot smoking detective in the 1970s. Joaquin Phoenix is set for the lead role, while other casting announcements are expected shortly as we get closer to the start date for filming next month. Older rumors stated that Charlize Theron was set for a major role, but that might not be true given that the actress has Dark Places and A Million Ways to Die in the West set for the next few months. Meanwhile, online speculation has lead to some believing that Robert Pattison and Vince Vaughn will be joining the cast (a rumor started by photos of the two with Phoenix at a party) but we won't know anything for sure until the studio makes an announcement. As for Del Toro, he will be playing a district attorney.

Meanwhile, Ewan McGregor is the latest actor to join the tumultuous production of Jane's Got a Gun, the Natalie Portman vehicle that was to be directed by Lynne Ramsay before she quit unexpectedly and was replaced by Gavin O' Connor. McGregor will play the film's villain, a role originally to be played by Michael Fassbender and, later, Bradley Cooper, before both actors dropped out. The film will follow a woman (Portman) who calls on a former lover (Joel Edgerton) to defend her farm after a gangster (McGregor) attacks her husband (Noah Emmerich of "The Americans"). It will certainly be interesting to see if McGregor will actually stick to the part.

In other news, Luke Evans has been cast in the titular role of The Crow, a reboot of the 1994 cult classic starring the late Brandon Lee. The film will find Evans playing a man who rises from the dead (with supernatural powers) and plans on avenging the brutal murder of he and his girlfriend. I saw the original quite a while ago, and will probably watch it again sometime soon, but I don't think a reboot is all that necessary. But, I doubt that matters. Evans takes the part that many actors- James McAvoy, Tom Hiddlestone and Alexander Skarsgard, to name three- were rumored for, while F. Javier Gutierrez directs. It will begin production in early 2014.

Next up, Keira Knightley has replaced Anne Hathaway for the lead role in Laggies, the Lynn Shelton dramadey that co-stars Chloe Moretz. Hathaway was forced to drop out of the project due to her commitment to Christopher Nolan's Interstellar. This film will find Knightley playing a woman who panics after her boyfriend proposes to her and spends time with a 16 year old she befriends (to be played by Moretz). The project sounds interesting, but I can understand why Hathaway would choose a role in Nolan's film over this. As for Knightley, she is hardly a bad choice. In fact, I'm quite a fan of Knightley's work.

Finally, Tom Cruise has signed on for a fifth Mission: Impossible 5. This is somewhat of a surprise, seeing that the fourth film of the franchise was used to set Paula Patton and Jeremy Renner as possible leads for future sequels. But, Ghost Protocol was a major success and Cruise's followup, Oblivion, was not. So, maybe this isn't much of a surprise. The director for this film hasn't been announced yet, but rumor has it we'll learn the name of who'll be at the helm of the fifth installment very soon. One of my favorite things about this franchise is that a new director takes on the series with each new installment. Each film feels distinct, and it prevents the audience from feeling like they're seeing the same thing over and over again. And I actually believe that this franchise has gotten better with each new installment. So I'm excited for it.

That's all for today! Check back tomorrow for more news, and later in the week for some box office talk, a review of The Great Gatsby and more!

Movie Review: "Iron Man 3"

Back in 2008, when Robert Downey Jr. first donned the red and gold armor, Iron Man was considered a "B-list" hero. But much has changed in the past five years, with Iron Man becoming one of the most financially successful superheroes at the movies, only to be absorbed into the third biggest blockbuster of all time, The Avengers. It's safe to say that Iron Man has flew from the B-list roster and stands high on the A-list now, but Robert Downey Jr. and Marvel are making the (wise) decision to go out when they're on top by (allegedly) ending the franchise with Iron Man 3- a film that is, essentially, everything you want from a summer movie spectacle. It might not be intellectually stimulating fare, but audiences that enjoy incredible special effects, badass action scenes and Robert Downey Jr.'s irresistible charm, will go home happy.

What makes Iron Man so entertaining is the character of Tony Stark- not the suit of armor he dons whenever he must face evil. What makes Tony different from every other superhero at the movies right now, especially in this age of dark and gritty reboots, is that he is constantly cracking jokes and making light of the situation- a sort of lovable smugness that Downey has captured perfectly over the last four years. But what's also fascinating about his character is his past. The fact that Stark used to be a greedy, womanizing jerk and that he is constantly trying to atone for his actions add as much dimension as a comic book adaptation could allow, and makes the audiences care for him. It's a story of redemption- who doesn't love that? In Iron Man 3, Tony is once again forced to redeem himself and audiences are immediately pulled into the story of how his less than noble actions on New Years Eve in 1999 started a domino effect leading up to the main conflict at the center of this story. And while The Avengers is woven into the story via occasional allusions and a subplot involving Tony's PTSD after almost being killed, the film doesn't feel like a sequel to the superhero mash-up. Iron Man 3 feels like both a stand alone film and an epic finale to a popular franchise.

But the film does fall prey to a major problem that threequels face- an attempt to cover too much ground in about 150 minutes. It feels as if writer/director Shane Black had a checklist of plot points he wanted to incorporate into the film. He clearly included them all, but didn't allow any of the audience a chance to reflect on what is truly going on. It's a double edged sword- on one hand, the audience will never be bored. Their are dozens of action scenes and the few minutes between them are just as entertaining thanks to funny dialogue and interesting plot developments. But, on the other, the film feels far too rushed. Everything moves at a breakneck speed, and the audience is essentially forced to form understandings about the characters based on the archetypes they've come to learn by seeing dozens of summer movies. The Mandarin (Ben Kngsely) is evil, but not necessarily because audiences are aware of the stakes at hand. We, as an audience, are just forced to accept that he is evil and is capable of doing terrible things. Meanwhile, the Mandarin's plan is never actually fleshed out more than it has to be, and whenever a new development is made Iron Man & co. quickly resolve the issue. Then, the Mandarin just reveals another facet to his evil plan and it all starts again.

That's not to suggest the script is bad, however. Granted, the film could benefit from slowing down a bit, but Shane Black has some serious talent as a screenwriter. The dialogue is fantastic, even if his true forte is in comedy and the many dramatic scenes resort to stock phrases and the occasional cliché. Black also knows how to throw some surprises into the mix, which is rare for a major blockbuster in general, let alone the third installment of a comic book franchise. There is a genuinely surprising plot twist, and a few welcome deviations from the traditional action flick formula. While Pepper (Gwyneth Paltrow) is certainly in danger quite a bit, she is far from a damsel in distress, while a new kid (Ty Simpkins) that helps out Tony as he faces off against evil is a welcome and surprisingly likable addition to the character roster.

The best thing about Black's script, however, is that the man behind the mask is just as entertaining as the mask itself thanks to strong writing. For much of the film, we are watching Tony Stark- not Iron Man- battle evil. Yet, even without the incredibly cool suit audiences have come to love, Iron Man 3 has the best action sequences out of the entire trilogy. At its best moments, Black makes the film feel like a spy movie, with Tony facing off against bad guys and investigating the mystery at the film's center. In fact, the Iron Man suits are only really used in the film's final third. But it doesn't matter in the long run- Black is aware of how much audiences love Tony Stark and use their affection for the character to make his suit-less scenes just as much fun as the explosive finale.

But, rest assured, the Iron Man suit plays a major role in the movie. But, strangely enough, it feels like Black is the first person to write an Iron Man movie who was aware of just how cool Tony's suits are. Without spoiling plot details, let's just say there are numerous types of armor depicted in the film, each of which possesses its own unique qualities. The action scenes near the end of this film are the definition of summer movie spectacle, with moments that will have the audience on the edge of their seats, hurriedly munching on their popcorn and slurping down their soda as they feast their eyes on the dazzling special effects. An attack on an airplane, and the midair rescue, is worth the price of admission alone, while the film's finale- which manages to incorporate dozens of Iron Man suits while still giving Tony a considerable amount of face time- is bound to leave audience's with a smile on their face.

One quick thing worth noting- this is not a film to see in 3D. The 3D effects on display are distracting and darken the movie to a point where it's almost impossible to understand what is going on. I saw the film twice- once in 3D, once in 2D- and the 2D viewing was considerably better.

Iron Man 3 is summertime fluff, but it's summertime fluff of the highest order. Fans of the franchise will absolutely adore this fitting "farewell" to their favorite superhero, while audiences as a whole are bound to enjoy the film's awe inspiring action scenes. Iron Man 3 is the textbook definition of a summer blockbuster, and while it might not be the best film you'll see all year, it's hard to imagine anyone leaving the movie unsatisfied.

OVERALL GRADE: B
___________________

Follow me on Twitter
Follow me on Tumblr
Follow me on Letterboxd

Our Top Story Tonight: Lots of Casting News Tonight

There is a lot to talk about tonight, so let's just dive right in...

Interstellar is quickly shaping up to be one of my most anticipated films of next year. Granted, we don't know anything about its plot, but Christopher Nolan is in the midst of assembling a stellar cast and tonight's announcement is quite exciting. Jessica Chastain, who has quickly catapaulted herself to A-list status thanks to stunning turns in The Help and Zero Dark Thirty, is set for the third lead role. She's joining the already cast Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway, both of whom are already cast. Deadline broke all three casting stories. Seeing that the film won't be released until November 2014, there is no point in getting excited just yet, but the cast thus far is remarkable. It's also pretty nice to see Nolan working on a project that doesn't involve Batman, as his best films (Inception and Memento) were original works. Hopefully Interstellar will uphold that tradition.

Bradley Cooper quickly found a foolproof way to avoid being typecast as "the douchebag from The Hangover"- he got an Oscar nomination for last year's fantastic Silver Linings Playbook. And now he seems to be interested in keeping his status as an Oscar contender, as the actor continues to sign up for interesting projects. He's already set to star in this December's American Hustle, which reunites him with director David O. Russell and two of his Silver Linings co-stars. He'll also play the male lead in Cameron Crowe's next romance, opposite Emma Stone. But today news broke that Cooper is set for not one but two major Oscar films set to be released over the next few years- and that one of those roles will hook him up with none other than Steven Spielberg. That film, titled American Sniper, will find Cooper playing Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle, who holds the record for most kills with 150. That will film in early 2014, after which he will star in Chef. That film follows Paris chef Adam Jones, who overcomes addiction and attempts to obtain three Michelin stars. It will be directed by John Wells (this November's August: Osage County). I'm much more interested in Chef than American Sniper, but it certainly seems like we'll be seeing a lot of Cooper over the next few years, and that certainly isn't a bad thing.

Then, on the comic book side of things, it seems that Michael B. Jordan is in negotiations to play the Human Torch in the upcoming Fantastic Four film, which will reunite him with Chronicle director Josh Tank. Now, my knowledge of the comic books is fairly limited, but I'm going to guess that the Human Torch and the Invisible Woman will not be siblings in this version of the famous series, seeing that Allison Williams was recently rumored to be in contention for the part of Susan Storm. But, I like both these young actors so I'm fine with the change in mythology. Though I'm sure many fanboys will find reason to complain. Also of note is that Chadwick Boseman (42) is being considered for the role of the Black Panther, who may be introduced at some point into the Avengers franchise. But all signs point that these are very early talks and nothing is definite.

Ending the night, I have attached the trailer to White House Down- a film that didn't impress me with its first trailer, but now looks like a ton of fun thanks to some solid jokes and Channing Tatum's infectious charm. Check it out below:

Betting on the Box Office: Iron Man 3 Set to Kick Off the Summer

I've been trying to find some way to incorporate box office predictions and results into the blog other than merely reporting the facts. Let's face it- that's kind of boring, and there are already great sites like Box Office Mojo for that. So, I'm going to introduce Betting on the Box Office- my weekly column (to be posted on Thursdays) that will offer in depth analysis and give a prediction for how the new releases will do on its opening weekend and throughout its entire run. So, let's get started...this should be an easy week, since there is only one release:

Iron Man 3 (dir. Shane Black)

Let's face it: Iron Man 3 will be huge. Hell, it already is huge. The film has already grossed $300 million at the worldwide box office... that's insane. So, needless to say, the film will have a huge opening weekend and could end up the highest grossing film of the year. But, just how bit will it be?

I don't see Iron Man 3 reaching an opening as big as The Avengers did last summer. $200 million is just too high. But, Iron Man 2 only grossed $128 million during its opening weekend... that's way too low. Iron Man 3 has to break $150 million- it has the buzz, the built in audience and a large fan base. How about $160 million? The Dark Knight Rises, which was one of the most anticipated films of last summer, grossed a huge $160 million. Does Iron Man 3 have the same amount of anticipation? Maybe not... but it does have 3D to figure in. So, I think it's flying well about $160. In fact, I'm going to bet that Iron Man 3 will have the second highest opening weekend of all time with a gross... $180 million.

But how much will Iron Man 3 gross in the long run? Again, I can't see it matching The Avengers' final tally. It's an event movie for sure. But I just don't think that it's that big of an event. For this, I feel the best comparison is The Dark Knight Rises. Iron Man 3 feels like a finale (even though, let's face it, it probably isn't) and the franchise has a lot of loyal followers that will be checking the film out throughout the summer. Granted, Iron Man 3 will face much more competition than The Dark Knight Rises did, what with Star Trek and Fast and Furious films on the way, but I still think a final tally around $450 million feels like a safe prediction.

Just how big will Iron Man 3 really be? We'll find out tomorrow, and I'll be back Sunday with a quick recap to see how I did with my predictions.

Why We Need Summer Movies

It was May 2002. I was in the second grade, and I loved Spider-Man. So it didn't come as a surprise when my parents asked if I wanted to go see Spider-Man in theaters. Every time the commercial came on TV, I got quiet and my eyes stayed glued to the screen. I had a love for that particular superhero for years, thanks in part to the many classic comics left over from my dad's childhood that he gave to me. Not to mention my favorite action figure- a Spider-Man toy that I brought with me everywhere. So, naturally, I wanted to see Spider-Man more than I had ever wanted anything in my short eight years of life. Yet, I turned down my parents offer to see the movie in theaters. Why? Because I was an abnormally paranoid eight year old and while my parents had brought me to see virtually every animated film released between 1998 and 2002, the idea of seeing a live action film on the big screen filled me with apprehension. It wasn't until November 1, 2002 that I saw the film that would awaken the film nerd inside of me.

What I find funny is that I remember the day I saw Spider-Man in vivid detail. I remember that my mom and I had planned, long in advance, that she would take me to Hollywood Video immediately after school ended. I remember running into the video store, tracking down the VHS and running to the front with my copy. I remember putting the movie on right away and sitting on the couch with my brother, smiling with anticipation for what was about to begin. And I remember deciding the very second it ended that I was going to watch it again tomorrow. And I did.

I loved movies from when I was a little kid. But, whether I realized it or not at the time, watching Spider-Man awoke something in me. Because after that, I couldn't stop watching movies. Sure, being nine years old my watching habits consisted, primarily, of silly action films and bad comedies. And, naturally, every movie I saw was the "best movie I have ever seen... other than Spider-Man." But suddenly watching movies was part of my daily routine. And as the years went on, my movie habits began to mature.

When I entered middle school my parents had moved to a new town with a much nicer library. I was a bit of a bookworm, so my parents took me to check it out almost immediately after moving in but all I noticed was the gigantic selection of films in the back room- all of which were available for free. Around the same time, I had discovered the Internet Movie Database and while I still wasn't reaching too far out of my comfort zone I at least started to watch older films, selecting mainstream hits from the 90s, 80s and sometimes even the 70s. And, instead of reviewing each film with "That was the best movie ever!" I became a bit more discerning (but I still tended to be overly passionate about films that really weren't all that great). Every weekend, I'd march into the library and rent an obscene amount of DVDs. And I'd watch most, if not all of them (clearly I wasn't a very social child). By the time eighth grade was wrapping up, I was becoming a bit of a critic. I was reading professional reviews regularly, stepping outside my comfort zone a bit by seeing a few (popular) independent films, and actually had somewhat intelligent things to say about a film- "it had a great script" or "I think it was pretty well directed" replaced "That was the best movie ever."

And then I had another major moment in my life as a film lover. It was the moment that awakened me to the difference between a "great, entertaining movie" and a "great movie." I saw Paul Thomas Anderson's 1997 epic Boogie Nights, a film that I was probably far too young for at the age of 14, but I watched it anyway. And it blew me away. From the opening scene, a long tracking shot that introduces every major character, I was in awe. "So this is what a great movie is" was my first thought after it came to an end. Boogie Nights was unlike anything I had seen before, and it filled me with that same sense of glee that Spider-Man supplied. Only for a different reason- I was suddenly pulled out of the realm of being a fan of movies and suddenly felt like a certifiable film geek. As soon as Boogie Nights ended, I started searching for every critically acclaimed film in existence to watch and to cherish. Granted, that's an of an unrealistic goal- it's been almost five years since I started watching movies seriously and I still have a long list of beloved movies I have yet to check out. But suddenly watching films was more than just a hobby. It was, and still is, a passion.

So, what does that all mean?

Earlier this week, Steven Soderbergh gave a speech at the San Francisco International Film Festival about how the big studios are destroying cinema by spending large sums of money on expensive but artistically bankrupt films, while smaller independent films are barely even given a release. This sentiment- which is nothing new, keep in mind- saddens me. Yes, I'd prefer to see a great film with brilliant direction and an intelligent screenplay over a brainless film with some fun action. But it does not bother me in the slightest that some people, maybe even a majority of people, wouldn't. Because if it did bother me, I'd be a hypocrite.

Over the summer, I try to go to the movies as much as possible. I love to see the independent art house films that are released. In fact, I am planning numerous trips this summer to see films like The Bling Ring or Blue Jasmine in theaters- movies that won't be playing near me, but will probably be amongst the year's best. But I also love going to see popcorn movies. Yes, some of them are truly terrible and a majority of them  will be forgotten in the weeks to come. But, first of all, I have wonderful memories of seeing these films with my friends and family. And, more importantly, there are some shining examples of films transcending their genre and becoming truly great movies. And the fact that alleged film lovers will write off an entire brand of movies really bothers me. Especially since so many people employ an elitist point of view- those who enjoy fluff are, apparently, less worthy of being called a "film lover."

Regardless of who is behind the camera, the amount of theaters it is shown in and the amount of money spent on it, a film is a film. Iron Man 3 and Star Trek Into Darkness are just as worthy of being reviewed as films like Only God Forgives or Frances Ha. They should be held to the same standard, and neither should be written off before actually being viewed. To do so is disrespectful to the people who worked on the film, and to the medium itself. I judge each film based on its own merits. I love The Avengers because I thought it had terrific dialogue and because its action scenes were staged fantastically- not because Marvel spent a fortune on it. I didn't like Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen because its script was horrific and the film came off as juvenile and borderline offensive- not because Dreamworks spent a fortune on it. Hell, I enjoyed the first  Transformers quite a bit! It was fun and for two and a half hours I was entertained. I never felt the need to revisit it and probably never will, but what is so bad about enjoying yourself for 150 minutes? I don't think I robbed any talented filmmakers by doing so. Not to mention the fact that I have seen some truly terrible small-budgeted films from directors who may not be working with a studio. But I've also seen great ones. The amount of money a studio is willing to spend on a film does not serve as an indicator to its quality.

But I also think blockbusters play an important role in the film community. How many film lovers had their passion for cinema begin by watching some sort of challenging art house film? Maybe I'm just being naive, but I don't think there are many. As I mentioned above, my passion for film started when I saw Spider-Man, a big budget action film that is heavily flawed but in the eyes of my eight year old self it was absolute perfection and showed me just how great watching movies can be. There is a movie like Spider-Man for every film lover that is writing about, talking about, and celebrating movies. And these movies, which the film community is so quick to write off, will be like Spider-Man for the next generation of film geeks. Yes, these films may be flawed. Yes, some of them may be terrible. But if watching that terrible movie sends someone on the path to finding great movies, than it has validated its existence.

The big studios in Hollywood churn out that are crap. But this is not a new issue. Hell, they talk about it in the 1950 classic Sunset Blvd. There will always be bad movies. But, there will always be good ones to. And the existence of bad movies, whether they are made for north of $200 million or on a shoe-string budget, will not lessen their quality. So why get so angry about people enjoying bad films? Do they prevent you from enjoying good ones? 

I loved Spider-Man. A part of me still loves it. Granted, it's not in my top five of all time. It's not in my top ten either. It's not even in my top 50. But because I saw it back when I was eight years old, I managed to seek out movies that allowed me to make a top 50 favorite films of all time list that is filled with titles that are respected by critics and cinephiles. So let's all stop getting so hung up on the fact that bad movies can make a lot of money, and let's just enjoy the wide variety of films that are made in this wonderful medium of entertainment.

Soderbergh's speech transcript courtesy of Rope of Silicon.